"Alexander Belopolsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | .. | > The cost of the extra functionality: writing it, reviewing it, adding | > unittests, documenting it, maintaining it, making sure it works on | > 64-bit machines, having Python book authors discuss it; and in | > addition some extra baggage in the executable that is never needed | > (but I think the other reasons are more compelling). There's a reason | > the xrange() object didn't have all this extra baggage. | > | > Remember, one of the goals of Py3k is to *shrink* the language so that | > it will fit in your brain again. This thread seems to be going in the | > opposite direction. | | I would say making range return a instance of Sequence will make that | feature easier to understand.
I agree that 'shrinking' the language means that range should either be a simple iterator or a full sequence. Something in between makes a new concept to learn. tjr _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
